Editing Trotskyism (section)

== Theory ==
{{Marxism|Variants}}
{{main|Permanent revolution}}
Until 1905, some revolutionaries<ref>{{Cite web |last=O'Callaghan |first=Einde |year=1934 |title=A Letter on Russia by Karl Marx |url=https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/newspape/ni/vol01/no04/marx.htm |access-date=7 June 2018 |via=[[Marxists Internet Archive]]}}</ref> claimed that [[Marx's theory of history]] posited that only a revolution in a European capitalist society would lead to a socialist one. According to this position, a socialist revolution could not occur in a backward, feudal country such as early 20th-century Russia when it had such a small and almost powerless capitalist class. In 1905, Trotsky formulated his theory of [[permanent revolution]], which later became a defining characteristic of Trotskyism.

The theory of permanent revolution addressed how such feudal regimes were to be overthrown and how socialism could establish itself, given the lack of economic prerequisites. Trotsky argued that only the working class could overthrow feudalism and win the [[peasant]]ry's support in Russia. Furthermore, he argued that the Russian working class would not stop there. They would win their revolution against the weak capitalist class, establish a workers' state in Russia and appeal to the working class in the advanced capitalist countries worldwide. As a result, the global working class would come to Russia's aid, and socialism could develop worldwide.

According to political scientist Baruch Knei-Paz, Trotsky’s theory of “permanent revolution” was grossly misrepresented by [[Joseph Stalin|Stalin]] as [[defeatism|defeatist]] and adventurist during the succession struggle when in fact Trotsky encouraged revolutions in Europe but was not at any time proposing “reckless confrontations” with the capitalist world.{{sfn|Knei-Paz|1978|p=343}}

=== Capitalist or bourgeois-democratic revolution ===
Revolutions in Britain in the 17th century and in France in 1789 abolished feudalism and established the essential requisites for the development of capitalism. Trotsky argued that these revolutions would not be repeated in Russia.

In ''Results and Prospects'', written in 1906, Trotsky outlines his theory in detail, arguing: "History does not repeat itself. However much one may compare the Russian Revolution with the Great French Revolution, the former can never be transformed into a repetition of the latter."<ref>{{Cite book |last=Trotsky |first=Leon |url=http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1931/tpr/rp03.htm |title=Results and Prospects |date=1962 |publisher=New Park publications |pages=184 |author-link=Leon Trotsky |orig-date=1931 |via=[[Marxists Internet Archive]]}}</ref> In the [[French Revolution of 1789]], France experienced what Marxists called a "[[bourgeois-democratic revolution]]"—a regime was established wherein the bourgeoisie overthrew the existing French feudalistic system. The bourgeoisie then moved towards establishing a regime of democratic parliamentary institutions.{{citation needed|date=April 2025}} However, while democratic rights were extended to the bourgeoisie, they were not generally extended to a universal franchise. The freedom for workers to organize unions or to strike was not achieved without considerable struggle.{{citation needed|date=April 2025}}

=== Passivity of the bourgeoisie ===
Trotsky argues that countries like Russia had no "enlightened, active" revolutionary [[bourgeoisie]] which could play the same role, and the working class constituted a tiny minority. By the time of the European revolutions of 1848, "the bourgeoisie was already unable to play a comparable role. It did not want and was not able to undertake the revolutionary liquidation of the social system that stood in its path to power."{{citation needed|date=April 2025}}

The theory of permanent revolution considers that in many countries that are thought under Trotskyism to have not yet completed a bourgeois-democratic revolution, the capitalist class opposes the creation of any revolutionary situation. They fear stirring the working class into fighting for its revolutionary aspirations against their exploitation by capitalism.{{citation needed|date=April 2025}} In Russia, the working class, although a small minority in a predominantly peasant-based society, was organised in vast factories owned by the capitalist class and into large working-class districts. During the Russian Revolution of 1905, the capitalist class found it necessary to ally with reactionary elements such as the essentially feudal landlords and, ultimately, the existing Czarist Russian state forces. This was to protect their ownership of their property—factories, banks, etc.—from expropriation by the revolutionary working class.{{citation needed|date=April 2025}}

Therefore, according to the theory of permanent revolution, the capitalist classes of economically backward countries are weak and incapable of carrying through revolutionary change. As a result, they are linked to and rely on the feudal landowners in many ways.{{citation needed|date=April 2025}} Thus, Trotsky argues that because a majority of the branches of industry in Russia originated under the direct influence of government measures—sometimes with the help of government subsidies—the capitalist class was again tied to the ruling elite. The capitalist class was subservient to European capital.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Trotsky |first=Leon |url=http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1931/tpr/rp01.htm |title=Results and Prospects |date=1962 |publisher=New Park publications |pages=174–177 |author-link=Leon Trotsky |orig-date=1931 |via=[[Marxists Internet Archive]]}}</ref>

=== The incapability of the peasantry ===
The theory of permanent revolution further considers that the [[peasantry]] as a whole cannot take on the task of carrying through the revolution because it is dispersed in small holdings throughout the country and forms a heterogeneous grouping, including the rich peasants who employ rural workers and aspire to [[landlord]]ism as well as the poor peasants who aspire to own more land. Trotsky argues: "All historical experience [...] shows that the peasantry are absolutely incapable of taking up an independent political role".<ref name="Results 204–205">{{Cite book |last=Trotsky |first=Leon |url=http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1931/tpr/rp05.htm |title=Results and Prospects |date=1962 |publisher=New Park publications |pages=204–205 |author-link=Leon Trotsky |orig-date=1931 |via=[[Marxists Internet Archive]]}}</ref>

=== The key role of the proletariat ===
Trotskyists differ on the extent to which this is true today. However, even the most orthodox tend to recognise in the late twentieth century a new development in the revolts of the rural poor: the self-organising struggles of the landless, along with many other struggles that in some ways reflect the militant united, organised struggles of the working class, which to various degrees do not bear the marks of class divisions typical of the heroic peasant struggles of previous epochs. However, orthodox Trotskyists today still argue that the town- and city-based working-class struggle is central to the task of a successful socialist revolution linked to these struggles of the rural poor. They argue that the working class learns of the necessity to conduct a collective struggle, for instance, in trade unions, arising from its social conditions in the factories and workplaces; and that the collective consciousness it achieves as a result is an essential ingredient of the socialist reconstruction of society.<ref>Many would put, for instance, the Committee for a Workers' International in this category of orthodox Trotskyists. See for instance {{Cite web |title=Che Guevara: A revolutionary fighter |url=http://www.socialistworld.net/eng/2007/09/27che.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071013213331/http://socialistworld.net/eng/2007/09/27che.html |archive-date=13 October 2007 |access-date=7 October 2007}}</ref>

Trotsky himself argued that only the [[proletariat]] or working class were capable of achieving the tasks of that bourgeois revolution. In 1905, the working class in Russia, a generation brought together in vast factories from the relative isolation of peasant life, saw the result of its labour as a vast collective effort, also seeing the only means of struggling against its oppression in terms of a collective effort, forming workers councils ([[Soviet (council)|soviets]]) in the course of the revolution of that year. In 1906, Trotsky argued: {{blockquote|text=The factory system brings the proletariat to the foreground [...] The proletariat immediately found itself concentrated in tremendous masses, while between these masses and the autocracy there stood a capitalist bourgeoisie, very small in numbers, isolated from the "people", half-foreign, without historical traditions, and inspired only by the greed for gain.|sign=Leon Trotsky|source=''Results and Prospects''<ref>{{Cite book |last=Trotsky |first=Leon |title=Results and Prospects |date=1962 |publisher=New Park publications |pages=183 |author-link=Leon Trotsky |orig-date=1931}}</ref>}}

For instance, the [[Kirov Plant|Putilov Factory]] numbered 12,000 workers in 1900 and, according to Trotsky, 36,000 in July 1917.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Trotsky |first=Leon |title=The History of the Russian Revolution |date=1977 |publisher=[[Pluto Press]] |volume=2 |pages=519 |chapter=July Days: Preparation and beginning |author-link=Leon Trotsky |chapter-url=http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1930/hrr/ch24.htm |via=[[Marxists Internet Archive]]}}</ref>

Although only a tiny minority in Russian society, the proletariat would lead a revolution to emancipate the peasantry and thus "secure the support of the peasantry" as part of that revolution, on whose support it will rely.<ref name="Results 204–205" /><ref group="note">Trotsky adds that the revolution must raise the cultural and political consciousness of the peasantry.</ref> However, to improve their conditions, the working class must create a revolution of their own, which would accomplish the bourgeois revolution and establish a workers' state.{{citation needed|date=April 2025}}

=== International revolution ===
Only fully developed capitalist conditions prepare the basis for socialism. According to [[classical Marxism]], a revolution in peasant-based countries such as Russia ultimately prepares the ground for capitalism's development since the liberated peasants become small owners, producers, and traders. This leads to the growth of commodity markets, from which a new capitalist class emerges.{{citation needed|date=April 2025}}

Trotsky agreed that a new socialist state and economy in a country like Russia would not be able to hold out against the pressures of a hostile capitalist world and the internal pressures of its backward economy.{{citation needed|date=April 2025}} Trotsky argued that the revolution must quickly spread to capitalist countries, bringing about a socialist revolution that must spread worldwide. In this way, the revolution is "permanent", moving out of necessity first, from the bourgeois revolution to the workers' revolution and from there uninterruptedly to European and worldwide revolutions.{{citation needed|date=April 2025}}

An [[Proletarian internationalism|internationalist]] outlook of permanent revolution is found in the works of [[Karl Marx]]. The term "permanent revolution" is taken from a remark of Marx in his March 1850 Address: "it is our task", Marx said: {{Blockquote|text=[...] to make the revolution permanent until all the more or less propertied classes have been driven from their ruling positions, until the proletariat has conquered state power and until the association of the proletarians has progressed sufficiently far—not only in one country but in all the leading countries of the world—that competition between the proletarians of these countries ceases and at least the decisive forces of production are concentrated in the hands of the workers.|sign=Karl Marx|source=''Address of the Central Committee to the Communist League''<ref>{{Cite web |last1=Marx |first1=Karl |author1-link=Karl Marx |last2=Engels |first2=Friedrich |author2-link=Friedrich Engels |date=March 1850 |title=Address of the Central Committee to the Communist League |url=http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/communist-league/1850-ad1.htm |access-date=6 June 2016 |via=[[Marxists Internet Archive]]}}</ref>}}

His biographer, Isaac Deutscher, has explicitly contrasted his support for proletarian internationalism against his opposition to revolution by [[military]] [[conquest]] as seen with his documented opposition to the [[Polish–Soviet War|war with Poland]] in 1920, proposed armistice with the [[Allies of World War I|Entente]] and temperance with staging [[British foreign policy in the Middle East|anti-British revolts]] in the Middle East.{{sfn|Deutscher|2015|pp=472–473}} Historian [[Robert Vincent Daniels]] believed that the practical differences, in the domain of [[foreign policy|international policy]], between the Left Opposition and other factions had been exaggerated and he contended that Trotsky was no more prepared than other Bolshevik figures to risk [[war]] or for the loss of [[trade]] opportunities despite his support for [[world revolution]].{{sfn|Daniels|2008|p=195}}

=== Socialist democracy and Workers' Control===
{{Main|Socialist democracy|Union democracy|Workers Control|Our Political Tasks|New Course (Trotsky book)|Soviet democracy}}
[[File:Lev Trotsky 1906-3.3 V1.jpg|250x250px|thumb|The [[Saint Petersburg Soviet|Soviet of Workers' Deputies of St. Petersburg]] in 1905, Trotsky in the center. The [[soviet (council)|soviets]] were an early example of a [[workers council]].]]

Prior to the October Revolution, Trotsky had been part of a tendency toward [[radical democracy]] which included both Left [[Mensheviks]] and Left [[Bolsheviks]].{{sfn|Daniels|2008|p=181}} His work, ''[[Our Political Tasks]]'', published in 1904 reviewed issues related to party organisation, [[public participation|mass participation]] and the potential dangers of [[substitutionism]] which he foresaw in a Leninist party model.{{sfn|Knei-Paz|1978|pp=176–199}} Trotsky would also assume a central role in the [[1905 revolution]]<ref>{{cite book |last1=Patenaude |first1=Betrand |chapter=Trotsky and Trotskyism |title=The Cambridge History of Communism |volume=1, World Revolution and Socialism in One Country 1917–1941 |date=21 September 2017 |publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]] |isbn=978-1-108-21041-6 |page=189 |language=en |quote="A prolific writer and a spellbinding orator, he was a central figure in the Russian Revolution of 1905 and the October Revolution of 1917, the organizer and leader of the Red Army in the Russian Civil War, the heir apparent to Soviet leader Vladimir Lenin, and the arch enemy and then vanquished foe of Joseph Stalin in the succession struggle after Lenin's death"}}</ref><ref>"He emerged from the revolution having acquired an enormous degree of popularity, whereas neither Lenin nor Martov had effectively gained any at all"{{cite web |title=Anatoly Lunacharsky: Revolutionary Silhouettes (1923) |url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/lunachar/works/silhouet/trotsky.htm |website=www.marxists.org}}</ref> and serve as the Chairman of the Petersburg Soviet of Workers' Delegates in which he wrote several proclamations urging for improved [[labour rights|economic conditions]], [[political rights]] and the use of [[strike action]] against the [[Russian Empire|Tsarist regime]] on behalf of workers.{{sfn|Thatcher|2005|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=cU3yFMLm1voC&dq=trotsky+1905+st+petersburg+soviet&pg=PT39 38–40]}}

In 1917, he had proposed the election of a new Soviet [[presidium]] with other [[socialist]] parties on the basis of [[proportional representation]].{{sfn|Deutscher|2015|p=293}} On the other hand, he had accepted the ban on rival parties in Moscow during the Russian Civil War due to their opposition to the [[October Revolution]]. Yet, he also opposed the extension of the ban to the Mensheviks in [[Georgian Soviet Socialist Republic|Soviet Georgia]].{{sfn|Deutscher|2015|p=595}}

In 1922, Lenin allied with [[Leon Trotsky]] against the party's growing [[Nomenklatura|bureaucratisation]] and the influence of [[Joseph Stalin]].<ref>{{cite book |last1=Mccauley |first1=Martin |title=The Soviet Union 1917-1991 |date=4 February 2014 |publisher=[[Routledge]] |isbn=978-1-317-90179-2 |page=59 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=7cbKAgAAQBAJ&dq=the+soviet+union+1917+1991+lenin+trotsky+bloc+1922&pg=PA59 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Deutscher |first1=Isaac |title=The Prophet Unarmed: Trotsky 1921-1929 |date=2003 |publisher=Verso |isbn=978-1-85984-446-5 |page=63 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=mgubj5z1XUcC&dq=lenin+trotsky+bloc+1922+stalin&pg=PA63 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Kort |first1=Michael G. |title=The Soviet Colossus: History and Aftermath |date=18 May 2015 |publisher=M.E. Sharpe |isbn=978-0-7656-2845-9 |page=166 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=BHaWGEZA5zMC |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Volkogonov |first1=Dmitriĭ Antonovich |title=Trotsky: The Eternal Revolutionary |date=1996 |publisher=HarperCollins |isbn=978-0-00-255272-1 |page=242 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=FdqOQgAACAAJ |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=V.L.Lenin |title="To L. D. Trotsky", 13 December 1922 |url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1922/dec/21.htm}}</ref> In 1923, Trotsky and a number of [[Old Bolsheviks]] who signed [[The Declaration of 46]] raised concerns to the Poliburo concerning intra-party democracy which shared similarities with Lenin's [[Vladimir Lenin#Declining health and conflict with Stalin: 1920–1923|proposed party reforms]] before his death. The signatories of the 46 letter expressed grievances related to the provincial conferences, party congresses and the election of committees. Separately, Trotsky would develop his views further with the publication of the ''[[New Course (Trotsky book)|New Course]]'' in 1924.{{sfn|Rogovin|2021|pp=155–182}}

In 1927, Trotsky and the [[United Opposition (Soviet Union)|United Opposition]] had argued for the expansion of [[economic democracy|industrial democracy]] with their joint platform which demanded majority representation of workers in trade union congresses including the [[All-Russian Congress of Soviets|All-Union Congress]] and an increase of non-party workers to one-third of representation in these elected organs.{{sfn|Rogovin|2021|pp=418–419}} They also supported legal protection for worker's right to criticise such as the right to make independent proposals. According to historian [[Vadim Rogovin]], these proposals would have developed democracy in the sphere of [[means of production|production]] and facilitated the establishment of worker's control over economic management.{{sfn|Rogovin|2021|pp=418–419}}

Following Stalin's consolidation of power in the [[Soviet Union]] and static centralization of political power, Trotsky condemned the Soviet government's policies for lacking widespread democratic participation on the part of the population and for suppressing [[workers' self-management]] and democratic participation in the management of the economy. Because these authoritarian political measures were inconsistent with the organizational precepts of socialism, Trotsky characterized the Soviet Union as a deformed workers' state that would not be able to effectively transition to socialism. Ostensibly socialist states where democracy is lacking, yet the economy is largely in the hands of the state, are termed by [[Orthodox Trotskyism|orthodox Trotskyist]] theories as [[Degenerated workers' state|degenerated]] or [[Deformed workers' state|deformed]] workers' states and not socialist states.<ref>Trotsky, Leon (1935). [http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1935/02/ws-therm-bon.htm "The Workers' State, Thermidor and Bonapartism"]. ''New International''. '''2''' (4): 116–122. "Trotsky argues that the Soviet Union was, at that time, a "deformed workers' state" or degenerated workers' state, and not a socialist republic or state, because the "bureaucracy wrested the power from the hands of mass organizations," thereby necessitating only political revolution rather than a completely new social revolution, for workers' political control (i.e. state democracy) to be reclaimed. He argued that it remained, at base, a workers' state because the capitalists and landlords had been expropriated". Retrieved 27 December 2019.</ref>

{{Quote box|width=25em|align=left|bgcolor=|quote=Bureaucratic autocracy must give place to Soviet democracy. A restoration of the right of criticism, and a genuine freedom of elections, are necessary conditions for the further development of the country. This assumes a revival of freedom of Soviet parties, beginning with the party of Bolsheviks, and a resurrection of the trade unions. The bringing of democracy into industry means a radical revision of plans in the interests of toilers.|source=Trotsky, ''The Revolution Betrayed'', 1936<ref>{{cite book |last1=Trotsky |first1=Leon |title=The Revolution Betrayed |date=15 March 2012 |publisher=Courier Corporation |isbn=978-0-486-11983-0 |page=218 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=uTrCAgAAQBAJ&dq=this+assumes+a+revival+of+freedom+of+soviet+parties+trotsky+revolution+betrayed&pg=PT209 |language=en}}</ref>}}

In 1931, Trotsky [[The Spanish Revolution, 1931–1939 (Trotsky book)|wrote]] a pamphlet on the [[Spanish Revolution of 1936|Spanish Revolution]] and called for the creation of worker’s juntas in emulation of [[soviet (council)|elected soviets]] as an expression of [[working class]] organisation.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Trotsky |first1=Leon |title=The Spanish Revolution, 1931–39 |date=1973 |publisher=Pathfinder Press |isbn=978-0-87348-273-8 |pages=97–98|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=BocizgEACAAJ |language=en}}</ref> Trotsky stipulated the need for shared participation of the communist factions, [[anarcho-syndicalists]] and [[socialists]].<ref>{{cite book |last1=Trotsky |first1=Leon |title=The Spanish Revolution, 1931–39 |date=1973 |publisher=Pathfinder Press |isbn=978-0-87348-273-8 |pages=97–98, 122–123|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=BocizgEACAAJ |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Leon Trotsky: Ten Commandments of the Spanish Communist (April 1931) |url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1931/04/spain.htm |website=www.marxists.org}}</ref>

In 1936, Trotsky argued in his work, ''[[The Revolution Betrayed]]'', for the restoration of the right of criticism in areas such as [[economic policy|economic matters]], the revitalization of [[trade unions]] and free elections of the [[List of political parties in the Soviet Union|Soviet parties]].{{sfn|Trotsky|1991|p=218}} Trotsky also argued that the excessive [[authoritarianism]] under Stalin had undermined the implementation of the [[First five-year plan (Soviet Union)|First five-year plan]]. He noted that several engineers and economists who had created the plan were themselves later put on trial as "[[Great Purge|conscious wreckers]] who had acted on the instructions of a foreign power".{{sfn|Trotsky|1991|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=hiCYS9Z3lDoC&q=trotsky+the+engineers+and+economists+who+created+this+plan+were+a+few+years+later+sternly+punished 28]}}
 
Polish historian and biographer, [[Isaac Deutscher]], viewed his inner-party reforms in 1923–24 as arguably the first act in the restoration of free Soviet institutions which the party had sought to establish in 1917 and the return of [[Soviet (council)|worker's democracy]] which would correspond with a gradual dismantlement of the [[one-party system|single-party system]].{{sfn|Deutscher|2015|pp=674–676}}
At the same time, Deutscher noted that Trotsky's attitude towards democracy could be characterised as inconsistent and hesitant by opponents but this stemmed from a range of reasons such as the [[Revolutions of 1917–1923|ill timing after the failed revolutions in the West]] and controversies around party schisms.{{sfn|Deutscher|2015|pp=674–676}}

In the ''[[The Death Agony of Capitalism and the Tasks of the Fourth International|Transitional Program]]'', which was drafted in 1938 during the founding congress of the [[Fourth International]], Trotsky reiterated the need for the legalization of the [[Second All-Russian Congress of Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies|Soviet parties]] and [[workers control|worker's control of production]].<ref name="books.google.com"/>

=== Uneven and combined development ===
{{Main|Uneven and combined development}}

The concept of uneven and combined development derived from the political theories of Trotsky.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Peck |first1=Jamie |last2=Varadarajan |first2=Latha |title=Uneven Regional Development |journal=International Encyclopedia of Geography: People, the Earth, Environment and Technology |date=6 March 2017 |pages=1–13 |doi=10.1002/9781118786352.wbieg0721 |url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9781118786352.wbieg0721 |publisher=John Wiley & Sons, Ltd |isbn=9780470659632 |language=en}}</ref> This concept was developed in combination with the related theory of permanent revolution to explain the historical context of Russia. He would later elaborate on this theory to explain the specific laws of uneven development in 1930 and the conditions for a possible revolutionary scenario.<ref>{{cite book |title=Cultures of Uneven and Combined Development: From International Relations to World Literature |date=8 July 2019 |publisher=[[Brill Publishers|BRILL]] |isbn=978-90-04-38473-6 |pages=1–20 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=tMqiDwAAQBAJ&q=Trotsky+uneven+and+combined+development |language=en}}</ref> According to biographer Ian Thatcher, this theory would be later generalised to "the entire history of mankind".<ref>{{cite journal |quote=Talk of uneven development becomes dominant in Trotskii's writings from 1927 onwards. From this date, whenever the law is mentioned, the claim consistently made for it is that 'the entire history of mankind is governed by the law of uneven development'. |first=Ian D. |last=Thatcher |author-link=Ian D. Thatcher |title=Uneven and combined development |journal=Revolutionary Russia |volume=4 |number=2 |date=1991 |page=237 |doi=10.1080/09546549108575572}}</ref>

Political scientists Emanuele Saccarelli and Latha Varadarajan valued his theory as a "signal contribution" to the discipline of [[international relations]]. They argued his theory presented "a specific understanding of capitalist development as "uneven", insofar as it systematically featured geographically divergent "advanced" and "backward" regions" across the [[world economy]].<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Saccarelli |first1=Emanuele |last2=Varadarajan |first2=Latha |title=Leon Trotsky and the political conundrum of international relations |journal=Global Social Challenges Journal |date=7 June 2023 |volume=-1 |issue=aop |pages=105–126 |doi=10.1332/CBXB8720 |s2cid=259805358 |url=https://bristoluniversitypressdigital.com/gsc/configurable/content/journals$002fgscj$002faop$002farticle-10.1332-CBXB8720$002farticle-10.1332-CBXB8720.xml |language=en|doi-access=free }}</ref>

=== Socialist culture ===
{{Main|Literature and Revolution|Problems of Everyday Life|New York Intellectuals}}

{{Quote box|width=25em|align=left|bgcolor=|quote=Faith merely promises to move mountains; but [[technology]], which takes nothing ‘on faith’, is actually able to cut down mountains and move them. Up to now this was done for industrial purposes (mines) or for railways (tunnels); in the future this will be done on an immeasurably larger scale, according to a general industrial and [[artistic]] plan. Man will occupy himself with re-registering mountains and rivers, and will earnestly and repeatedly make improvements in [[nature]].|source=—Trotsky, ''Literature and Revolution'', 1924<ref>{{cite book |last1=Trotsky |first1=Leon |title=Literature and Revolution |date=2005 |publisher=Haymarket Books |isbn=978-1-931859-16-5 |page=204 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=MG-981usVQEC&dq=man+will+occupy+himself+with+re+registering+mountains+and+rivers+and+will+earnestly+and+repeatedly+make+improvements+in+nature&pg=PA204 |language=en}}</ref>}}

In ''[[Literature and Revolution]]'', Trotsky examined aesthetic issues in relation to class and the Russian revolution. Soviet scholar Robert Bird considered his work as the "first systematic treatment of art by a Communist leader" and a catalyst for later, Marxist cultural and critical theories.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Bird |first1=Robert |title=Culture as permanent revolution: Lev Trotsky's Literature and Revolution |journal=Studies in East European Thought |date=1 September 2018 |volume=70 |issue=2 |pages=181–193 |doi=10.1007/s11212-018-9304-6 |s2cid=207809829 |url=https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11212-018-9304-6 |language=en |issn=1573-0948}}</ref> He had also defended intellectual autonomy in relation to the Russian [[literary movements]] and scientific theories such as [[Freud's psychoanalytic theories|Freudian psychoanalytic theory]] along with [[Einstein]]’s [[theory of relativity]] during the succession period. However, these theories were increasingly marginalised during the Stalin era.{{sfn|Deutscher|2015|pp=729–730}}

In ''"[[Problems of Everyday Life]]"'', a contemporaneous book which further articulated his views on culture and science, Trotsky argued that cultural development would accentuate industrial and technical progress. He viewed both elements to be interrelated components as part of dialectical interaction in which he viewed the low level of Russian [[technology|technique]] and [[expertise]] to be a function of cultural backwardness. According to Trotsky, Western industrial techniques and products such as the radio should not be rejected due to their status as a product of a capitalist system but rather absorbed into the Soviet socialist framework to facilitate new forms of techniques and cultural production.{{sfn|Knei-Paz|1978|pp=282–300}}  In this interpretation, the [[Technology transfer|transference of techniques]] brought new cultural changes in terms of rationalism, [[efficiency]], exactitude and [[service quality|quality]].{{sfn|Knei-Paz|1978|pp=282–300}}

Trotsky would later co-author the 1938 ''[[Manifesto for an Independent Revolutionary Art]]'' with the endorsement of prominent artists [[Andre Breton]] and [[Diego Rivera]].{{sfn|Deutscher|2015|pp=1474–1475}} Trotsky's writings on literature such as his 1923 survey which advocated tolerance, limited censorship and respect for literary tradition had strong appeal to the [[New York Intellectuals]].<ref>{{cite book |last1=Patenaude |first1=Betrand |title="Trotsky and Trotskyism" in The Cambridge History of Communism |volume=1, World Revolution and Socialism in One Country 1917–1941R |date=21 September 2017 |publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]] |isbn=978-1-108-21041-6 |page=204 |language=en}}</ref>

Trotsky presented a critique of contemporary literary movements such as [[Futurism]] and emphasised a need of cultural autonomy for the development of a socialist culture. According to literary critic [[Terry Eagleton]], Trotsky recognised "like Lenin on the need for a socialist culture to absorb the finest products of bourgeois art".<ref name="Marxism and Literary Criticism"/> Trotsky himself viewed the proletarian culture as "temporary and transitional" which would provide the foundations for a culture above classes. He also argued that the pre-conditions for artistic creativity were economic well-being and emancipation from material constraints.{{sfn|Knei-Paz|1978|pp=289–301}}

Political scientist, Baruch Knei-Paz, characterised [[The Social and Political Thought of Leon Trotsky|his view]] on the role of the party as transmitters of culture to the masses and raising the standards of education, as well as entry into the cultural sphere, but that the process of artistic creation in terms of language and presentation should be the domain of the practitioner. Knei-Paz also noted key distinctions between Trotsky's approach on cultural matters and [[Socialist realism#Stalin era|Stalin's policy in the 1930s]].{{sfn|Knei-Paz|1978|pp=289–301}}

=== Economics ===

{{Main|Economic planning|Socialist economics|Planned economy|Mechanised agriculture|Left Opposition||Scissors Crisis|Soviet grain procurement crisis of 1928}}

Trotsky was an early proponent of economic planning since 1923 and favored an accelerated pace of industrialization.<ref name=Twiss>{{cite book |last1=Twiss |first1=Thomas M. |title=Trotsky and the Problem of Soviet Bureaucracy |date=8 May 2014 |publisher=BRILL |isbn=978-90-04-26953-8 |pages=88–113 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=3o2fAwAAQBAJ&dq=Trotsky+economic+planning+1923&pg=PA135 |language=en}}</ref> In 1921, he had also been a prominent supporter of [[Gosplan]] as a newly established body and called for the strengthening of its formal responsibilities to support a balanced level of economic reconstruction after the Civil War.{{sfn|Deutscher|2015|p=587}} Lenin and [[Politburo]] members had also proposed he served as deputy chairman with a focus on economic matters related to the either [[Council of Labor and Defence#New name, new role|STO]], Gosplan or the Council of National Economy.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Douds |first1=Lara |title=Inside Lenin's Government: Ideology, Power and Practice in the Early Soviet State |date=22 August 2019 |publisher=Bloomsbury Academic |isbn=978-1-350-12649-7 |page=165 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Yf5aEAAAQBAJ&dq=on+lenin%27s+initiative+trotsky+deputy&pg=PA165 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Getty |first1=J. Arch |title=Practicing Stalinism: Bolsheviks, Boyars, and the Persistence of Tradition |date=27 August 2013 |publisher=[[Yale University Press]] |isbn=978-0-300-16929-4 |page=53 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=RaYzAAAAQBAJ&dq=Lenin+Trotsky+chairman+gosplan+1923&pg=PA53 |language=en}}</ref>

Trotsky had urged economic [[decentralisation]] between the state, [[oblast]] regions and factories to counter structural inefficiency and the problem of bureaucracy.<ref name="BRILL"/> He had proposed the principles underlying the [[New Economic Policy|N.E.P.]] in 1920 to the [[Politburo]] to mitigate urgent economic matters arising from war communism. He would later reproach Lenin privately about the delayed government response in 1921-1922.{{sfn|Deutscher|2015|pp=507–508, 585}}{{sfn|Rubenstein|2011|p=[https://archive.org/details/leontrotskyrevol0000rube/page/160/mode/2up?q=forced+collectivization 161]}} However, his position also differed from the majority of Soviet leaders at the time who fully supported the [[New Economic policy]].<ref name=Twiss /><ref>{{cite book |last1=Day |first1=Richard B. |title=Leon Trotsky and the Politics of Economic Isolation |date=1973 |publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]] |isbn=978-0-521-52436-0 |page=109 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=cGx-pzsksksC&dq=Trotsky+economic+planning+1923&pg=PA109 |language=en}}</ref>

Comparatively, Trotsky believed that planning and N.E.P should develop within a mixed framework until the socialist sector gradually superseded the private industry.{{sfn|Deutscher|2015|p=646}} He found allies among a circle of economic theorists and administrators which included [[Yevgeni Preobrazhensky|Evgenii Preobazhensky]] along [[Georgy Pyatakov]], deputy chairman of the [[Supreme Soviet of the National Economy|Council of the National Economy]]{{sfn|Deutscher|2015a|pp=592}} and had more broadly the support of many party [[intellectuals]].<ref>{{cite book |last1=Volkogonov |first1=Dmitri |title=Trotsky: The Eternal Revolutionary |date=June 2008 |publisher=[[HarperCollins]] |isbn=978-0-00-729166-3 |page=284 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=2BNwaOW1VgEC |language=en}}</ref>

Trotsky had specified the need for the "overall guidance in planning i.e. the systematic co-ordination of the fundamental sectors of the state economy in the process of adapting to the present market" and urged for a national plan<ref>{{cite web |title=Trotsky: The Single Economic Plan |url=https://wdc.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/russian/id/8044/ |website=wdc.contentdm.oclc.org |language=en}}</ref> alongside currency stabilization.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Nove |first1=Alec |title=Socialism, Economics and Development (Routledge Revivals) |date=12 November 2012 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-136-58266-0 |pages=89–90 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=NWn4BbCEH6gC&dq=Trotsky+economic+planning+1923&pg=PA89 |language=en}}</ref> He also rejected the Stalinist conception of industrialisation which favoured [[heavy industry]]. Rather, he proposed the use of [[foreign trade]] as an accelerator and to direct investments by means of a system of comparative [[coefficients]].<ref>{{cite book |last1=Gueullette |first1=Agota |title=Trotsky and foreign economic relations. Brotherstone, Terence; Dukes, Paul,(eds) |date=1992 |publisher=Edinburgh University Press |isbn=978-0-7486-0317-6 |page=212}}</ref>

{{Quote box|width=25em|align=right|bgcolor=|quote=The problem of agriculture is a much more complicated one, and there is nothing surprising in this to the Marxian mind. The change from the system of small individual peasant holdings to socialist methods of land cultivation is only conceivable after a number of consecutive stages of progress in technical science in economics and culture.|source=-Trotsky on the need for a gradual and scientific [[social ownership|socialization]] of agriculture in ''“[[Towards Socialism or Capitalism?]]”'', 1926.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Trotsky |first1=Leon |title=Towards Socialism Or Capitalism? |date=16 July 2012 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-0-415-62338-4 |page=6 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=TKRxnF5qB1IC}}</ref>}}

Trotsky and the Left Opposition developed a number of economic proposals in response to the [[scissor crisis]] which had undermined relations between the workers and peasants in 1923–1924. This included a [[progressive tax]] on the wealthier sections of populations such as the [[kulak]]s and [[NEPmen]] alongside an equilibrium of the import-export balance to access accumulated reserves to purchase machinery from abroad to increase the pace of industrialization.{{sfn|Mandel|1995|p=62}}<ref>{{cite web |title=Documents of the 1923 opposition |url=https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/document/ilo/1923-lo/index.htm |website=www.marxists.org}}</ref> The policy was later adopted by members of the United Opposition which also advocated a programme of rapid industrialization during the debates of 1924 and 1927. The United Opposition proposed a progressive tax on wealthier peasants, the encouragement of [[agricultural cooperatives]] and the formation of collective farms on a voluntary basis.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Kemp |first1=Tom |title=Industrialisation in the Non-Western World |date=14 January 2014 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-317-90133-4 |pages=1–150 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=rjWtAgAAQBAJ&dq=trotsky+progressive+tax+left+opposition&pg=PT67 |language=en}}</ref>

Trotsky as president of the [[electrification]] commission along with members of the Opposition bloc had also put forward an electrification plan which involved the construction of the [[hydroelectric]] [[Dnieper Hydroelectric Station|Dnieprostroi dam]].<ref>{{cite book |last1=Carr |first1=Edward Hallett |title=A History of Soviet Russia |date=1970 |publisher=Baltimore, Md. : Penguin Books |page=180 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=WbobAAAAIAAJ&q=Trotsky+electrification |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Trotsky |first1=Leon |title=My Life |date=2 March 2023 |publisher=Wellred Books |pages=1–50 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=MioAEAAAQBAJ&dq=trotsky+electrification+offering+the+peasant+a+gramophone+instead+of+a+cow&pg=PT58 |language=en}}</ref> According to historian [[Sheila Fitzpatrick]], the scholarly consensus was that Stalin appropriated the position of the Left Opposition on such matters as [[industrialisation]] and [[collectivisation]].<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Fitzpatrick |first1=Sheila |title=The Old Man |journal=London Review of Books |date=22 April 2010 |volume=32 |issue=8 |url=https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v32/n08/sheila-fitzpatrick/the-old-man |language=en |issn=0260-9592}}</ref> In exile, Trotsky maintained that the disproportions and imbalances which became characteristic of Stalinist planning in the 1930s such as the underdeveloped [[consumption (economics)|consumer base]] along with the priority focus on [[heavy industry]] were due to a number of avoidable problems. He argued that the industrial drive had been enacted under more severe circumstances, several years later and in a less rational manner than originally conceived by the Left Opposition.{{sfn|Deutscher|2015|p=1141}}

[[Ernest Mandel]] argued the economic programme of Trotsky differed from the forced [[Collectivization in the Soviet Union|policy of collectivisation]] implemented by Stalin after 1928 due to the levels of brutality associated with its enforcement.{{sfn|Mandel|1995|p=59}} Notably, Trotsky sought to raise taxation on wealthier farmers and encourage farm labourers along with poor peasants to form collective farms on a voluntary basis in conjunction with the allocation of state resources to agricultural [[machinery]], [[fertilizers]], [[credit]] and [[agronomic]] assistance.{{sfn|Deutscher|2015|p=1130}}

In 1932–33, Trotsky insisted upon the need for mass participation in the operationalisation of the planned economy:<blockquote>"Insoluble without the daily experience of millions, without their critical review of their own collective experience, without their expression of their needs and demands and could not be carried out within the confines of the official sanctums.... even if the [[Politburo]] consisted of seven universal geniuses, of seven Marxes, or seven Lenins, it will still be unable, all on its own, with all its creative imagination, to assert command over the [[economy]] of 170 million people".<ref>{{cite book |last1=Trotsky |first1=Leon |title=Writings of Leon Trotsky. [Edited by George Breitman and Evelyn Reed: 1932-33 |date=1972 |publisher=Merit Publishers |page=96 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=WUo8AAAAIAAJ&q=even%20if%20the%20Politburo%20consisted%20of%20seven%20universal%20geniuses,%20of%20seven%20Marxes,%20or%20seven%20Lenins,%20it%20will%20still%20be%20unable,%20all%20on%20its%20own,%20with%20all%20its%20creative%20imagination,%20to%20assert%20command%20over%20the%20economy%20of%20170%20million%20people |language=en}}</ref></blockquote>

British [[cybernetician]] [[Stafford Beer]] who worked on a [[decentralization|decentralized]] form of economic planning, [[Project Cybersyn]] from 1970 to 1973, was reported to have read and been influenced by Trotsky's critique of the [[nomenklatura|Soviet bureaucracy]].<ref>"Beer also read Trotsky and found inspiration in Trotsky's critique of the Soviet bureaucracy".{{cite book |last1=Medina |first1=Eden |title=Cybernetic Revolutionaries: Technology and Politics in Allende's Chile |date=10 January 2014 |publisher=MIT Press |isbn=978-0-262-52596-1 |page=292 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=VBC3AgAAQBAJ&dq=Stafford+beer+Trotsky&pg=PA292 |language=en}}</ref>

The economic platform of a [[planned economy]] combined with an authentic [[socialist democracy|worker's democracy]] as originally advocated by Trotsky has constituted the programme of the Fourth International and the modern Trotskyist movement.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Weber |first1=Wolfgang |title=Solidarity in Poland, 1980-1981 and the Perspective of Political Revolution |date=1989 |publisher=Mehring Books |isbn=978-0-929087-30-6 |page=ix |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=-FCyCDv9QswC&dq=trotskyists+planned+economy+workers+democracy+programme&pg=PR9 |language=en}}</ref>

=== Transitional program ===
{{Main|The Transitional Program}}

Trotsky drafted the transitional programme as a programmatic document for the founding congress of the Fourth International in 1938.<ref name="Pathfinder Press">{{cite book |last1=Trotsky |first1=Leon |title=The Transitional Program for Socialist Revolution: Including The Death Agony of Capitalism and the Tasks of the Fourth International |date=1977 |publisher=Pathfinder Press |isbn=978-0-87348-524-1 |pages=38–40 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=rL8gAQAAIAAJ&q=the+transitional+program+trotsky |language=en}}</ref>

He explicitly emphasised the core need for the programme::<blockquote>

"It is explicitly necessary to help the masses in the process of the daily struggle to find the bridge between present demands and the socialist program of the revolution. This bridge should include a system of transitional demands, stemming from today's conditions and from today's consciousness of wide layers of the working class and unalterably leading to one final conclusion: the conquest of power by the proletariat".<ref name="Pathfinder Press"/></blockquote>

The transitional programme features three types of proposals for action. This includes democratic demands such as [[labor rights|the right of unions]] and [[self-determination]]; immediate demands which are concerned with everyday struggles such as [[equal pay|wage increases]] and transitional demands which are directed at the capitalist system such as [[Workers' council|worker's control of production]] .<ref name="Pathfinder Press"/>

=== Scientific socialism ===
{{Quote box|width=25em|align=right|bgcolor=|quote=We must give a scientific explanation of society, and clearly explain it to the masses.That is the difference between Marxism and reformism.|source=—Trotsky on the transitional program of the [[Fourth International]].<ref>{{cite book |last1=Trotsky |first1=Leon |title=The Transitional Program for Socialist Revolution: Including The Death Agony of Capitalism and the Tasks of the Fourth International |date=1977 |publisher=Pathfinder Press |isbn=978-0-87348-524-1 |page=180 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=rL8gAQAAIAAJ&q=the+transition+program+for+socialist+revolution |language=en}}</ref>}}
In his collection of texts, ''[[In Defence of Marxism (book)|In Defence of Marxism]]'', [[Leon Trotsky]] defended the [[dialectical materialism|dialectical method]] of scientific socialism during the factional schisms within the American Trotskyist movement during 1939–40. Trotsky viewed dialectics as an essential method of analysis to discern the class nature of the Soviet Union. Specifically, he described scientific socialism as the "conscious expression of the unconscious historical process".{{sfn|Trotsky|2019|pp=31, 68–70, 138}} According to Daniels, Trotsky conceived historical revolutions as a long, interrelated process of political and social struggle which undergo various stages with national and international dimensions.{{sfn|Daniels|2008|pp=83–92}}

Prior to his expulsion from the Soviet Union, Trotsky had encouraged [[empirical]] studies with the use of Marxist methods for social and historical development. He also insisted on the need for a [[intellectual freedom|freedom of science]], including theoretical research, in 1925 for socially useful purposes.{{sfn|Knei-Paz|1978|pp=476–495}} Trotsky defended [[Einstein]]’s [[theory of relativity]] in Soviet intellectual circles but this became an anathema during the Stalin era and was only rehabilitated following the latter's death.{{sfn|Deutscher|2015|p=30}}

In line with the scientific outlook of Marxist philosophy, Trotsky placed a heavy emphasis on science to alleviate the level of backwardness among the Soviet masses. Concurrently, he viewed socialism as a progressive struggle for [[science]], culture and morality in which science should be given the maximum scope for development.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Sheehan |first1=Helena |title=Marxism and the Philosophy of Science: A Critical History |date=23 January 2018 |publisher=[[Verso Books]] |isbn=978-1-78663-426-9 |page=172 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=-udOEAAAQBAJ&dq=trotskyists+science+and+technology+emphasis&pg=PA172 |language=en}}</ref> In 1918, he had supported [[Taylorism]] along with Lenin as a means of scientifically managing industries with the support of foreign engineers.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Hughes |first1=Thomas P. |title=American Genesis: A Century of Invention and Technological Enthusiasm, 1870-1970 |date=21 May 2020 |publisher=[[University of Chicago Press]] |isbn=978-0-226-77290-5 |pages=255–256 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ZjfnDwAAQBAJ&dq=trotsky+scientific+experts&pg=PA257 |language=en}}</ref> Multiple historians have stressed the [[technocratic]] nature of his governance proposals compared to Stalin and Bukharin with a higher reliance on "bourgeois" experts and specialists.{{sfn|Swain|2014|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=_a3pAgAAQBAJ&dq=trotsky%27s+soviet+union+would+have+been+far+more+technocratic&pg=PA118 118]|ref=Swain2014a}}{{sfn|Daniels|2008|p=189}}<ref>{{cite book |last1=Sandle |first1=Mark |title=A Short History Of Soviet Socialism |date=16 September 2003 |publisher=[[Routledge]] |isbn=978-1-135-36639-1 |pages=151–171 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=UO2OAgAAQBAJ&dq=trotsky+modernist+industrialist+technocratic&pg=PT253 |language=en}}</ref>

Trotskyists have emphasised the dialectical relationship between [[objectivity (science)|objective]], [[material conditions]] and [[subjectivity and objectivity|subjective factors]] such as party, leadership in understanding the nature of change in historical events.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Grant |first1=Ted |author1-link=Ted Grant |title=History of British Trotskyism |publisher=Wellred Books |pages=1–282 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=LAPaDwAAQBAJ&dq=trotsky+objective+subjective+factors&pg=PT227 |language=en}}</ref>

=== United front and theory of fascism ===
[[File:Fascism.png|thumb|Leon Trotsky's original pamphlet '''''"[[Fascism]]: What it is and how to fight it"''''' argued for the tactical method of a united front to counter the rise of [[Nazi Germany]]]]
{{Main|United front|The Struggle Against Fascism in Germany}}
{{Quote box|width=25em|align=left|bgcolor=|quote=At a time when hundreds of thousands and millions of workers, especially in Germany, are departing from Communism, in part to fascism and in the main into the camp of indifferentism, thousands and tens of thousands of Social Democratic workers, under the impact of the self-same defeat, are evolving into the left, to the side of Communism. There cannot, however, even be talk of their accepting the hopelessly discredited Stalinist leadership.|source=—Trotsky's writings on the challenge of Stalinism and fascism in 1933.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Trotsky |first1=Leon |author-link=Leon Trotsky |title=The Struggle Against Fascism in Germany |date=1971 |publisher=Pathfinder Press |isbn=978-0-87348-136-6 |pages=555–556 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=nH5KwgEACAAJ |language=en}}</ref>}}

Trotsky was a central figure in the [[Comintern]] during its first four congresses. During this time, he helped to generalize the strategy and tactics of the Bolsheviks to newly formed Communist parties across Europe and further afield. From 1921 onwards, the [[united front]], a method of uniting revolutionaries and reformists in the common struggle while winning some of the workers to revolution, was the central tactic put forward by the Comintern after the defeat of the German revolution.

After he was exiled and politically marginalized by Stalinism, Trotsky continued to argue for a united front against fascism in Germany and Spain. According to Joseph Choonara of the British [[Socialist Workers Party (UK)|Socialist Workers Party]] in ''[[International Socialism (magazine)|International Socialism]]'', his articles on the united front represent an essential part of his political legacy.<ref>Joseph Choonara, [http://www.isj.org.uk/index.php4?id=397&issue=117 "The United Front"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080107230355/http://www.isj.org.uk/index.php4?id=397&issue=117 |date=7 January 2008}}, ''[[International Socialism (magazine)|International Socialism]]'', 117.</ref>

Trotsky also formulated a theory of fascism based on a dialectical interpretation of events to analyze the manifestation of [[Italian fascism]] and the early emergence of Nazi Germany from 1930 to 1933.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Wistrich |first1=Robert S. |title=Leon Trotsky's Theory of Fascism |journal=[[Journal of Contemporary History]] |date=1976 |volume=11 |issue=4 |pages=157–184 |doi=10.1177/002200947601100409 |jstor=260195 |s2cid=140420352 |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/260195 |issn=0022-0094}}</ref>

Marxist theorist and economist [[Hillel Ticktin]] argued that his political strategy and approach to fascism such as the emphasis on an organisational bloc between the [[Communist Party of Germany|German Communist Party]] and [[Social Democratic Party of Germany|Social-Democratic party]] during the interwar period would very likely have prevented [[Adolf Hitler]] [[Adolf Hitler's rise to power#Weimar parties fail to halt Nazis|from ascending to political power]].{{sfn|Ticktin|1992|p=227}}

=== Political ethics and morality ===

{{Quote box|width=25em|align=right|bgcolor=|quote=A means can be justified only by its end. But the end in turn needs to be justified. From the Marxist point of view, which expresses the historical interests of the proletariat, the end is justified if it leads to increasing the power of man over nature and to the abolition of the power of man over man.|source=—Trotsky's writings on "The Dialectical Interpedence of Ends and Means".{{sfn|Knei-Paz|1978|p=559}}}}

In 1938, Trotsky had written ''[[Their Morals and Ours: The class foundations of moral practice|Their Morals and Ours]]'' which consisted of [[ethics|ethical polemics]] in response to criticisms around his actions concerning the [[Kronstadt rebellion]] and wider questions posed around the perceived, "[[amorality|amoral]]" methods of the Bolsheviks. Critics believed these methods seemed to emulate the [[Jesuit]] [[Maxim (philosophy)|maxim]] that the "[[Consequentialism|ends justifies the means]]". Trotsky argued that Marxism situated the foundation of morality as a product of society to [[Marxian class theory|serve social interests]] rather than “"eternal moral truths" proclaimed by institutional religions.{{sfn|Knei-Paz|1978|pp=556–560}} On the other hand, he regarded it as farcical to assert that an end could justify any criminal means and viewed this to be a distorted representation of the Jesuit maxim. Instead, Trotsky believed that the means and ends frequently “exchanged places” as when [[democracy]] is sought by the [[working class]] as an instrument to actualize socialism. He also viewed revolution to be deducible from the [[dialectical materialism|laws of the development]] and primarily the [[class struggle]] but this did not mean all means are permissible.{{sfn|Knei-Paz|1978|pp=556–560}} Fundamentally, Trotsky argued that ends "rejects" means which are incompatible with itself.{{sfn|Deutscher|2015|p=1482}} In other words, [[socialism]] cannot be furthered through [[fraud]], [[The Stalin School of Falsification|deceit]] or [[Stalin's cult of personality|the worship of leaders]] but through honesty and integrity as essential elements of [[revolutionary]] morality in dealing with the working masses.{{sfn|Deutscher|2015|p=1482}}